RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:34 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:19 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 18493
Location: The blue parts of the map
Today's photo showed it rolling off the lander, and leaving tracks in the lunar dust.

Since the "dark side" is really just the "side unseen from Earth," there's a problem with line of sight radio communication. The landing was completely autonomous. It had to miss craters and such. That side faces out, so it gets cratered a lot. After that, the rover talks to an orbiter the Chinese also put up, which talks to Earth.

The Chinese are growing plants on the moon. No not in the lunar soil, no air and water, just in an enclosure.

It seems evident that they would love to beat everyone and put a permanent base there with people and everything. That would change things. I always thought the real reason for a US program to get people on the moon in the Cold War period was fear that the Russians would get there first, start a base, and threaten to drop large rocks on us.

Lunar escape velocity isn't that great. The main problem is getting the math just right. Big enough, and targeted enough, these rocks would enter the atmosphere like any other meteor, and make a nuclear size bang with no known defense.

_________________
"Our democratic institutions... seem to have been upended by frat-boy billionaires from California," remarked Canadian politician Charlie Angus. (BBC, 11/27/18)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 7:46 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:07 am
Posts: 17099
ive always thot the main reason for going to space was the realization, acknowledgement, that
we had fucked this planet up so badly we had to stick humans elsewhere to keep the specie going,
not that that is necessarily a good thing seeing how destructive homo sapien is and has been
all along once they gathered together to get the lords blessing.

you know, like sending all those europeans to merica since europe couldnt support or feed them in
any fashion after the clear cutting of europe--poor people use firewood--and the lack of food due to
ice and melts and mud and over population of poor people.


once a human walked on the moon it then became a different odyssey. they still want to find a
new location to plant the deadly homo sapien but i aint holding any breath on that one.

_________________
Who are these...flag-sucking halfwits fleeced fooled by stupid little rich kids They speak for all that is cruel stupid
They are racists hate mongers I piss down the throats of these Nazis Im too old to worry whether they like it Fuck them.
HST.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:02 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 13804
Location: Sunny South Florida
www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com


"There is no dark side
of the moon really.
Matter of fact
it's all dark."

Good movie. It's about a guy whose job is to hurl rocks from the Moon back to Earth.

www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:59 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12185
Today's photo showed it rolling off the lander, and leaving tracks in the lunar dust.

Since the "dark side" is really just the "side unseen from Earth," there's a problem with line of sight radio communication. The landing was completely autonomous. It had to miss craters and such. That side faces out, so it gets cratered a lot. After that, the rover talks to an orbiter the Chinese also put up, which talks to Earth.

The Chinese are growing plants on the moon. No not in the lunar soil, no air and water, just in an enclosure.

It seems evident that they would love to beat everyone and put a permanent base there with people and everything. That would change things. I always thought the real reason for a US program to get people on the moon in the Cold War period was fear that the Russians would get there first, start a base, and threaten to drop large rocks on us.

Lunar escape velocity isn't that great. The main problem is getting the math just right. Big enough, and targeted enough, these rocks would enter the atmosphere like any other meteor, and make a nuclear size bang with no known defense.


This is a nice link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chang%27e_4

I noticed that the lander's dry mass is quite small. Less than ten percent of the Apollo lander's dry mass, and that doesn't account for the fact that the Chang craft lands almost completely dry, and the Apollo LM landed only partially dry because it still carried the fuel for the top half to take off again.


I wrote an undergraduate class paper on the topic of the impractical aspect of throwing Moon rocks at the Earth. It was somewhat based on a personal experience I had had years before when I cast a batch of Lead muzzle loader balls which would not withstand the rigors of acceleration in the barrel and their flight through the air. They disintegrated into a powder before they got to the target.

It was an analysis of what the minimum structural specifications that the rocks would have to meet so that they could be launched from the Moon, travel through space, and then travel through the atmosphere intact. The basic math I used was difficult for third year, and because I didn't have a mainframe access account I could tap I didn't deal with resonance at all which would become a major factor during an atmospheric entry.

I concluded that it would be inconceivable to quarry natural stone on Earth or the Moon able to meet those minimum structural specifications.

That Moon base idea would have to including building a modern reinforced Moon rock factory on the Moon as a part of that effort.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:40 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 18493
Location: The blue parts of the map
I think they also talked about it in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Of course, that was Heinlein being Heinlein. Were he around today, I suspect he'd be hanging with Bannon and the other goons.

Good SF doesn't break any laws of physics, but it usually messes with the fringes quite a bit. Dropping rocks off the moon inhabits this fringe somewhere. I think the acceleration problem could be solved, but the Earth atmospheric entry is not as simple as just stuff falling and going off like that asteroid over Russia some years back.

Agreed that it's probably simpler to use the ICBM technology we already have. It's still very deadly if done right. This is why you don't do shit like drumpf screwing around and starting another arms race just so Raytheon stock will go up.

In the late 1950s, which is when people started talking about going to the moon, this wasn't very well developed and also everything was passed through a Cold War lens that made it a US-Russia contest. Everything. Sports, ballet, education, you name it.

Note how Apollo was cancelled after it became obvious that the Russian lunar program had faltered. Not long after that, we did a complete 180 and started docking unused Apollo capsules with Russian Soyuz. The rest is history.

_________________
"Our democratic institutions... seem to have been upended by frat-boy billionaires from California," remarked Canadian politician Charlie Angus. (BBC, 11/27/18)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:25 am 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 12185
Heinlein's male heroes were of the type to have a blaster strapped to their harry thigh. Hidden under their kilt.

His heroins were beautiful and sweet of breath. Their blasters were hidden in their purse, along with everything else Macgyver might need.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:28 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 13484
Heinlein's male heroes were of the type to have a blaster strapped to their harry thigh. Hidden under their kilt.

His heroins were beautiful and sweet of breath. Their blasters were hidden in their purse, along with everything else Macgyver might need.

That's true of just about any genre whether it's in the movies or books. The men are manly and the women are beautiful and can kick ass.

_________________
When you vote Left you vote right.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group